Harry Harperson’s a vile one

The Labour MP Harriet Harman has introduced a proposed law change that would prevent rape complainants from being quizzed in court about their sexual history, saying the move was needed in the wake of the acquittal of the footballer Ched Evans.

Evans won his appeal last year in a case that centred on evidence from two other men who testified about the complainant’s sexual preferences and the language she used during sex.

A law change in 1999 had barred such court tactics, but permitted defence lawyers to apply to introduce a complainant’s previous sexual history under certain circumstances. The Evans case prompted significant disquiet about how this clause could be used. Harman has tabled an amendment to the government’s prisons and courts bill, which reaches the committee stage in the Commons next week, to remove the exception.

The idea of introducing a complainant’s sexual history into a rape trial had “no evidential value” and was deeply outdated, Harman said. “It’s based on the old notion that there were two sorts of women – those who were ‘easy’ and those who were virtuous – and if you were easy, you would have sex with anybody, because you were that sort of woman,” she said. “What you have to look at is the evidence and the information around that encounter, not any previous sexual encounters.”

But the sexual history had great evidential value here, which is exactly why you’re trying to ban it of course.

54 comments on “Harry Harperson’s a vile one

  1. “Harman said she hoped Conservative women MPs, including some of the new contingent elected in 2015, could press Truss to back the measure. She said: “This is an opportunity to see whether or not there can be an alliance of women in the House of Commons who are for really mainstream women’s issues.””

    *boggle*

    Yeah, the lass on the Clapham omnibus is really, really concerned about this.

  2. She is evil indeed.

    If she had her way, I doubt they’d even bother with a trial. An accusation would be enough.

  3. And as I said before, why is it always assumed that said sexual history will always make the woman look like a slut, instead of the opposite? Bit of an assumption, isn’t it?

  4. “The idea of introducing a complainant’s sexual history into a rape trial had “no evidential value”..“It’s based on the old notion…”

    No, it’s based on the idea that if the defendant claims that the girl seemed to be enjoying it and shouted “give it to me big boy with that pile driving ramrod of yours” and the defence can produce a string of blokes who say they went to bed with her consensually and say she shouted exactly the same thing, then the jury should hear about it so they can decide if it is relevant.

    “The Evans case prompted significant disquiet…”

    It did indeed. The girl had no memory of what happened and did not make a complaint to police. It is a medical fact that inebriation causes short term memory loss and that someone can be in control of themselves and have no memory of what they did the next morning (“I can’t remember how I got back home”). So it’s possible that she consented but couldn’t remember doing so the next day. It’s certainly a possibility. To say that someone who can’t remember the night before CANNOT have been in a position to consent is just plain wrong.

    I don’t know what happened in the Ched Evans case but then neither does the girl in question so the conviction seemed to me to be, at the least, dubious.

    He said she consented.

    She said she had no idea what happened.

    Reasonable doubt?

  5. The whole thing is an exercise in bad faith. What this vile woman means is that not enough men are convicted. What she wants to do is make the process less fair to the accused so that more men are convicted. But she won’t quite say this outright.

    Of course a woman’s history is probative. It helps everyone understand what took place. Maybe not enough men are convicted of rape. Removing what legal protections are left is not a sensible way to make sure more men are convicted.

    It is absurd that she wanted more legal protection for paedophiles than she does for heterosexual males.

  6. It is a medical fact that inebriation causes short term memory loss

    The main impact, which is even more relevant here, is it prevents transfer from the short term storage system into the medium term system.

  7. It is a medical fact that inebriation causes short term memory loss

    And herein lies the rub.

    The latest public service adverts make it quite clear that informed consent cannot be given if someone is pissed. So now men have to be medically qualified enough to determine at winch point during an evening a woman moves from being a bit pissed but being able to remember giving consent and a bit more more pissed and not being able to remember.

    “This is an opportunity to see whether or not there can be an alliance of women in the House of Commons who are for really mainstream women’s issues.”

    Typical left position – all women should be like me otherwise they must be evil or Thatcher or summat.

  8. SMFS

    I seem to recall that mid-nulab she did say she wanted conviction rates increased.

    Presumably, this is all to atone for her enthusiastic support of sex with children years ago.

  9. “If a woman enjoys consensual rape fantasy roleplay, can she ever be raped for real?”

    Is that a serious question Matthew L or are you trying to make some leftist femmi-sucking point of some sort?

    Harman should be fined 3 months wages plus loss of equivalent amount of pension for even bringing the idea forward.

    The problem is that Dress-Up May is of the same ilk–a BluLabour femmi-stooge –as the “Viet girls” nonsense shows and she just laps up this kind of CM shite.

  10. If a woman enjoys consensual rape fantasy roleplay, can she ever be raped for real?

    Yes.

    Next moronic question?

  11. There was once a quaint motion that the criminal law procedure was a shield for the accused rather than a sword for the accuser.

  12. We’re all guilty if we don’t agree with the progressives. That’s why they are called “progressive”: we are backward-looking animals, they are forward-leaning visionaries.
    It doesn’t really matter how or why we disagree, we’re all guilty and thus it doesn’t really matter what we’re convicted of either. Sex crimes are particularly useful because there’s a lifetime register.

  13. It just seems to me that a sexual history full of consensual rape roleplay would be somewhat of a barrier to a rape conviction if the rapist rounded up a few former partners and said “Well mine was consensual too”. Which way would you vote, were you on the jury?

  14. “Labour MP wants to stop claimants being quizzed in court about their sexual history”

    Wouldn’t have had any effect in the Ched Evans case as the women in question wasn’t the claimant, the police/CPS were.

  15. “It is a medical fact that inebriation causes short term memory loss”
    But I don’t believe a word of it. Despite the (far too much) anecdotal evidence I’ve heard over the years.
    Yeah. OK. When someone’s got to the stumbling & mumbling stage where they need holding up, sometimes. They don’t know what they’re doing while they’re doing it, so expecting them remembering it the next day’s a bit of a hope. Normally they can’t remember the next minute.
    But the idea that people can be operating perfectly coherently & wake up a blank…do me a favour. Funny how they only seem to suffer memory loss of things it’s convenient to suffer memory loss. Like spewing all over your car seats. But can recount, in monotonous detail, what a hero they’ve been the rest of the evening.

  16. @JuliaM

    I was just about to make the same point. That sort of role-playing isn’t a free-for-all.

    Safe words are used.

    Just don’t use “harder” as your safe word (haha).

  17. More than once I’ve not had a clue how I got home, what happened the night before etc. This despite being perfectly able to hold conversations, get myself home etc. Memory loss is a thing.

    Matthew L – it depends on her evidence and his. That’s the beauty of juries – they hear and see it all.

  18. bis “But the idea that people can be operating perfectly coherently & wake up a blank…do me a favour.”

    https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh27-2/186-196.htm

    As requested, I’ve done you a favour and provided a link.

    My own purely anecdotal history included many university nights out when I couldn’t remember much, if anything, only to be told “you didn’t seem that drunk” by the people I was with.

  19. JuliaM: Pretty easy for him to claim she never used her safeword.

    Interested: Juries have their pre-existing prejudices though, mostly along the lines of “she’s a slut so she deserved it”. You see plenty of opinions like that expressed in this comment section for example.

  20. Mathew L

    There are tens of thousands of jury trials each year. I’m sure you’re a very clever chap but I would like to know how you know what pre-existing prejudices juries have? Sounds like a pre-existing prejudice to me. Even if you’re right, the answer is that it’s one of those foibles of human life. Attempts to correct it will not help and will result in fewer convictions, not more. Juries do not appear to like defendants not apparently getting a fair crack of the whip. It will end in Diplock courts staffed by feminist loons.

  21. It will end in Diplock courts staffed by feminist loons.

    Which is exactly where the grotesque harridan wants it to go – I suspect we all know that.

  22. I’d add:

    Those courts would also be modeled on the Court of Protection as presently constituted.

    Calling HH “frightful” gets part way there but doesn’t communicate the malice that she brings to the matter.

  23. “This is an opportunity to see whether or not there can be an alliance of women in the House of Commons who are for really mainstream women’s issues.”

    No true Scotsman would vote against it.

  24. “the answer is that it’s one of those foibles of human life. Attempts to correct it will not help and will result in fewer convictions, not more”

    Which brings me back to my original question, perhaps with a slight modification –

    If a woman has a sexual history that won’t be looked on favourably by a jury, what’s stopping a rapist from getting away with raping her?

  25. What about the sexual history of the man? Is that a factor? If yes, why isn’t the woman’s? Equality works both ways.

  26. “You see plenty of opinions like that expressed in this comment section for example.”

    Give us some examples.

    Pointing out that deliberate calculating or demented female liars exist (aided, abetted and enabled by Marxian feminist scum) and need to be recognised not given a blank check is very different from advocating rape or minimising the actual crime.

  27. The woman in the Ched Evans case is not a complainant, did not claim to have complained, and did not file a complaint. She just wanted her handbag back and asked the police for help.

    I’m sure Harman would have complained if it was here, but it wasn’t her, so she should back off denying other women their agency. Is it easy to become a QC like Harman, because it should be a lot harder if saying this is her headline offering to the electorate

  28. ML:”If a woman has a sexual history that won’t be looked on favourably by a jury, what’s stopping a rapist from getting away with raping her?”

    Well lets not forget the record UK female loon who made 11 false potentially life-ruining accusations against 11 men–none of whom where guilty and most of whom had never been in arms length of her before the CPS morons decided enough was enough –in her case. She got 16 months –so she will have been out in less than 6.

    Or the woman who made 5 allegations of rape against 5 ex-boyfriends. Not too safe saying ta-ra to her then.

    Injustice cuts both ways. There are enough female liars to ensure that no rape claim can just be uncritically accepted.

  29. “There are enough female liars to ensure that no rape claim can just be uncritically accepted.”

    I never said it could. The false accusation rate for rape is about the same as for other crimes.

    Are there any other crimes where the victim’s history is taken into account? If somebody has been burgled five times and on the sixth she identifies the culprit, is she roasted in court for not moving to a safer neighbourhood?

  30. The false accusation rate is about the same for rape as it is for other crimes?

    Is there a source for this assertion?

  31. “If somebody has been burgled five times and on the sixth she identifies the culprit, is she roasted in court for not moving to a safer neighbourhood?”

    How is that even remotely the same thing? More relevant would be someone who has a history of giving gifts to strangers claiming to have been mugged.

  32. @MatthewL: “If a woman enjoys consensual rape fantasy roleplay, can she ever be raped for real?”

    I trust your wife never develops that fantasy, because I know that a man that tried that defence against mine would be better off making sure I couldn’t find him.

    I think you are confusing “fantasy” with an actual predilection for rough sex.

  33. Noticed in the recent Broadchurch that they referred to someone pleading not guilty in a rape case as ‘forcing the victim to testify’ which seemed to reflect an assumption along the lines of this.

  34. I was brought on the notion that one of the things that made us Great was our justice system and the presumption of innocence – better that 10 guilty me go free than one innocent man jailed.

    In this specific case before any evidence of past sexual history can be put before a jury it has to be approved by a judge as being relevant.

    Whilst I have a lot of sympathy for the way women have been treated while giving evidence I think there’s enough protection there to ensure sexual history isn’t abused but the accused is given a fair opportunity to test allegations.

  35. Notice the bait and switch…

    “Harman said it was increasingly common for rape trials to hear defence applications to cross-examine the complainant under the exception,”

    No mention of what proportion of applications are granted, just that applications are rising.

  36. I note Ms. Harman is calling on women to support this. Does she expect men to vote according to their sex?

  37. Oh, and also no attempt at a qualitative evaluation to determine if applications are being granted or refused as parliament intended.

  38. Magnusw, good point. Also, whether there is correlation with the number of cases where the CPS is the primary driver. If your alleged victim won’t state emphatically that she was raped, I would hope there’s more to be proven for a conviction.

  39. Matthew L
    March 25, 2017 at 2:12 pm
    “Are there any other crimes where the victim’s history is taken into account? If somebody has been burgled five times and on the sixth she identifies the culprit, is she roasted in court for not moving to a safer neighbourhood?”
    ———————————
    There aren’t many types of cases where whether or not an action was a crime is solely based on permission.

    A closer analogy would be where, say, a woman was accusing a man of stealing her car.
    If he claimed that she gave permission for him to borrow the car it would seem perfectly fair to be able to present evidence that she previously routinely lent the car to him, or even to other people in a similar relationship to her.
    Conversely, if there was evidence that she refused to previously lend her car to him or anyone in general, that would be relevant too.
    In neither case might the evidence be definitive but it would seem reasonable to weigh it in the balance.

  40. ‘Matthew L
    March 25, 2017 at 9:42 am

    If a woman enjoys consensual rape fantasy roleplay, can she ever be raped for real?’

    WTF ‘rape fantasy roleplay’ is consensual, Rape is not consensual. Without going into a long blog diatribe, you are one seriously sick motherfucker.

  41. Harriet is deranged and delusional but appears fully functional, that’s why she can get away with it.

  42. Unless there’s (1) the threat of (or actual) violence, or (2) the non-consensual use of drugs to sedate or disinhibit, it should not be classed as rape.

  43. The feminist mad bitches have been trying stuff like this for ages. Usually the British public refuse to convict.

    Coming soon, it will be trial with no Jury.

  44. Matthew L – “The false accusation rate for rape is about the same as for other crimes.”

    How do you know?

    “Are there any other crimes where the victim’s history is taken into account?”

    If someone had had six prior car accidents involving claims for unspecified back and neck injuries, wouldn’t you want to know? There are no crimes where the victim’s history is ruled out altogether.

    Pat – “I note Ms. Harman is calling on women to support this. Does she expect men to vote according to their sex?”

    Men should. Too often men are sold out by other men posing as White Knights. We should stick together.

    BobRocket – “Harriet is deranged and delusional but appears fully functional, that’s why she can get away with it.”

    I would say that she is deranged and delusional in a socially approved way. So that is why she gets away with it. If she said these sort of things about Jews – or Blacks – she would be in trouble. But she can say it about men because it is a widely shared delusion.

    Theophrastus – “Unless there’s (1) the threat of (or actual) violence, or (2) the non-consensual use of drugs to sedate or disinhibit, it should not be classed as rape.”

    Statutory rape? How about impersonating someone else?

  45. Matthew L – “You see plenty of opinions like that expressed in this comment section for example.”

    Let me join with Mr Ecks in asking where? Who made any such claim?

    Why are you trying to shame and intimidate other people into silence on this issue? What is your problem? In fact if we are so deplorable, why are you here? Wouldn’t you feel safer somewhere else like CiF?

    Matthew L – “If a woman has a sexual history that won’t be looked on favourably by a jury, what’s stopping a rapist from getting away with raping her?”

    If a woman doesn’t have a sexual history that won’t be looked on favourably by a jury, what is stopping a rapist with getting away with raping her? Nothing. Juries are blunt tools. They are capricious. They can go either way.

    That doesn’t mean there is any reason to make them worse.

    A friend of mine has schizophrenia that she combined with hard drug use. She was very pretty too. As you can imagine her life was not easy. But having schizophrenia and a history of drug use means that virtually any crime against her was unprosecutable. It is hard to see what jury would believe her in a rape case. As long as the defendant was half-way credible. I can’t see a solution to this problem. Maybe you can. Certainly refusing to let the jury know she had a serious mental health problem is not a solution.

  46. JS car conversion is a good parallel.

    There an accident say the fault of the drunk borrower of the car.

    Did the owner give permission?

    Well after the accident and the risk of no insurance she/he might decide they didn’t.

  47. “How about impersonating someone else?”

    The onus should be on the woman to confirm the identity of whoever she copulates with.

  48. bloke in spain,

    “But I don’t believe a word of it. Despite the (far too much) anecdotal evidence I’ve heard over the years.”

    If you’re blotto enough, it definitely happens.

    And here’s the problem when it comes to women: alcohol turns women in to dogs. They lose inhibitions and shag blokes in a similar way that blokes will shag birds. They wake up sober the next day and think that some bloke must have raped them because there’s no way they’d have been that easy.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.