llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 It offers an introduction into a subject that can be more thoroughly researched to gather further information. I use it as a source not a definitive source,people can decide for themselves whether they choose to read or ignore it. I read the newspapers sometimes but i don't always believe every detail i read in them.That hasn't stopped me from posting links from articles i have read, the same as a lot of other people on the forum. newspapers do lie clearly but at least they have some accountability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 My claim now?! I was quoting research I didn't pluck a figure out of the air. From the Fawcett Society website: If you all want to argue abut what constitutes rape and question statistics, I am leaving you to it. For some reason you're in denial about the scale of the problem. Let's just hope that it never happens to you or one of your nearest and dearest, eh? The UK prison population is 100,000 so there are definitely not 47,000 convictions for rape each year, unless half the prison population are rapists and only spend a year in side. Without a conviction and evidence presented to a court we can’t know if rape as taken place. But let’s assume there are 47000 rapes each year, it would take 160 years to get to 8,000,000 which is 25% of women, so already one set of statistics you have quoted contradicts another set of statistics. I have no doubt that rape takes place and is an unforgivable crime, it’s just not happening on the scale you believe. Someone for some reason is producing inaccurate figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 :hihi: Since this isn't Friday afternoon and I haven't been invited to the SU bar to debate it ... is it appropriate to discuss the matter here? (Will you be bringing beer?) The form is a waste of time. It would be valid from the time it was signed right up until she (or he!) changed hisser mind. - Consent can be withdrawn at any time during intercourse (any time before ejaculation. - Right up to the 'vinegar stroke'. - or arguably, the one before. BUT although females may not be convicted of rape they CAN be charged with 'committing a serious sexual assault'. In the event that the male was underneath and he withdrew his consent just before the 'vinegar stroke', could the female be charged with committing a 'serious sexual assault'? Who knows? Time moves on. The world is changing. Perhaps males should learn to be more submissive. "I was on top of him, he said 'No' but I carried on anyway" may not send her down for 15 years, - but it won't send you down, either. If, of course, you happen to get on well (as most couples do) the argument is irrelevant. Why would you want to send her down? It's not Lent, either. So I wouldn't be able to sue for breach of contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 This thread is a statistical nightmare. Statistically only 37 % of the statistics quoted here are likely to be correct and of them only 60 will be uncontested....I am 25 % confident that I am correct 1/8 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 newspapers do lie clearly but at least they have some accountability. I have no regrets about posting that link, as well as being alarming its inforrnative, and for anyone interested offers an opportunity for further study,and i thank you for drawing attension to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 No..I'm saying that consent from the perps point of view is irrelevant..he doesn't require consent, he doesn't even consider it..but as his defense it may be very important. If the victim said "yes" if only as a means to reduce the effects and acknowledges the "yes"under oath, the judge would have to acquit on grounds of consent. Gladly this is not how the judicial system works and why we have a jury system...in other words "yes" can mean "no" and quite rightly seen for what it is. In the case of a woman who is in a relationship yes means yes and most likely based on her relationship and a chattel mindset that prevails to this day (heavily disguised mind you)rather than the actual perceived crime. Marriage or relationships should have no bearing on a woman making an allegation other than they are familiar with one another...otherwise we'll end up assessing on grounds of how much cleavage is shown or the type clothing worn as a distraction. If a woman falsely accuses a man of rape and is found to do so then the law should be applied in exactly the same way as if the man was found guilty...I have no issue with that and equally zero tolerance. But..and this isn't an excuse..these false allegations are very rare in comparison to the conviction rate of rapists, sexual violence and paedophiles. If that rate of conviction mirror imaged the rate of false allegations our prisons would be almost empty of sexual deviants. Work calls. But most accusations of rape end up being withdrawn before they go to court which would imply it’s not rare. And only 50% of the cases that go to court secure a conviction, so the other 50% could also have been false accusations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Myths about rape conviction rates are putting people off going to the police. The conviction rate for rape is 58%. That bears repeating. The conviction rate for rape, is 58%. The conviction rate for reportable crimes of all types is 57%. I know you will have heard the figure of 6%. Everyone has. That figure is actually an attrition rate, not a conviction rate, and even as an attrition rate it is wrong – the attrition rate for rape is in the region of 12%. An attrition rate is the amount of convictions resulting from reports of a crime, and is not routinely calculated for any crime other than rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Who doesn't take this crime seriously ? I cannot think of anyone that does not think it is an appalling crime. I can't think of anyone that doesn't think its an appalling crime either,but thery're are people who hear about these crimes who choose to view the enormity of these crimes from a distance.It just becomes another "statistic" unless its someone they know personally. Returning to the start of the thread and the subject of child victims,one last link.> http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/children/1in5/whatweknow/overall_EN.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 But most accusations of rape end up being withdrawn before they go to court which would imply it’s not rare. And only 50% of the cases that go to court secure a conviction, so the other 50% could also have been false accusations. AAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH - how do you arrive at the conclusion that cases that get dropped/withdrawn are synomous with false allegations? The ignorance being displayed on here is overwhelming. Have you actually read any of the credible research as to why cases get dropped and withdrawn? It is a futile exercise trying to debate this issue with idiots who have preconceptions like yourself. I am going to channel my energies elsewhere where I can really make a useful contribution and help those who really need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I can't think of anyone that doesn't think its an appalling crime either,but thery're are people who hear about these crimes who choose to view the enormity of these crimes from a distance.It just becomes another "statistic" unless its someone they know personally. Sadly I think this is the case with most crimes against the person or their property which can have a dramatic effect. Returning to the start of the thread and the subject of child victims,one last link.> http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/children/1in5/whatweknow/overall_EN.asp A suggested figure is quoted. Anything can be suggested, the true figure could be more or less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.